Pit Bulls Should Be Banned

Discussion in 'Free Thoughts' started by valich, Dec 10, 2006.

  1. valich Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,501
    Every year dozens of innocent infants and children are killed by pit bulls and people seriously injured through unprovoked attacked. These are vicious animals that were intentionally bred through artificial selective breeding programs to "kill" in a "pit." Hence the name "pit bull." There is no civilized reason why they should have ever been selectively bred in the first place, they are nothing but vicious "killing machines," and they should be constitutionally banned at the federal level. Numerous cities and counties have already inacted laws prohibited them, but almost always "after" a child gets killed by one.

    What we need is Breed-Specific Legislation (BSL); in simple terms, a statute or regulation that is directed toward this specific "dangerous" breed. Pit bull dogs have already been brought to the public's attention as a threat, and such legislation is strongly supported by the American Kennel Club (AKC). Stringent laws governing, preventing and/or restraining pit bulls have been passed in many states. For example, Florida's City Commission passed an ordinance that requires persons who own pit bull dogs to sign registration forms and prove the possession of $25,000 of public liability insurance. Towns in Missouri, New Mexico and Cincinnatti have completely banned pit bulls and allowed county officers to confiscate and euthanize the dogs. Cincinnati's regulation defines "vicious dogs to include all pit bull terriers" and puts special restrictions on their confinement, sale, and control.

    Proponents of these laws cite a number of reasons for supporting breed-specific regulations. For example, Peg Jordan, an Oakland, California resident, was recently mauled by a pit bull and spent several days in the hospital with more surgery to come. Although she owns two German Shepherds, she argues that dog owners rationalize their dogs' conduct, and that she is fed up with dog owners who intend their dogs to be "fuzzy guns." In Fort Lauderdale, Florida, the Broward County Legislative Committee is now considering a bill that would ban specific breeds of dogs from public areas. The Fort Lauderdale community has become hotly concerned about the "intimidating pit bulls" on the beachfront which are "scaring 'family' tourists" away. They are also fedup will this menacing threat. Broward County has been the site of 115 pit bull dog bites.

    We need to inact legislation now at the constitutional federal level to alleviate this deadly problem in the United States. People and parent's of children should not have to be worried or concerned about this clear and obvious, yet blatantly irresponsible threat, when they innocently and casually go for a walk down the street or take a stroll on a public beach somewhere.

    Overview of Current Municipal Animal Control Ordinances:
    http://www.animallaw.info/articles/ovusodmunicipalordinances.htm
    http://animalpetdoctor.homestead.com/laws.html
     
    Last edited: Dec 10, 2006
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. TimeTraveler Immortalist Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,023

    Sir, Fuck you. First you want to ban guns, now dogs? Sorry but I think thats complete bullshit.

    If you don't want to deal with the pitbull, don't break into someones house or jump over someones fence. As long as the animal is behind a fence, inside a house, or on a leesh, what right do you have to ban it?

    You want to ban it because it's vicious? It's SUPPOSED to be vicious, it's a self defense attack dog. If you leave an infant around a pitbull, a doberman or any sorta dog then you are an idiot. It's stupid to leave an infant around a cat too.

    I highly, disagree with your reasoning, I think it's flawed, I think your idea to ban pitbulls is a slippy slope to banning self defense completely. Yeah first it will be pitbulls, then dobermens, then all dogs that can be used for self defense.

    What do people like you have against self defense? Why do you want to make people defenseless?

    Even if you banned pitbulls, most people would gladly pay the fine to keep their dog. It's even more emotional than taking away guns because people love their dogs.
     
    Last edited: Dec 10, 2006
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. valich Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,501
    I think you're confusing me with someone else. I never posted anything about banning guns. Yes, "as long as the animal is behind a fence or inside a house" there is no problem.

    Sir, this is not what the post is saying. This is a serious public safety issue involving random unprovoked and unsuspecting attacks by a sharp set of jaws that will rip your guts, neck and throat out in an instant - nothing at all like a cat's claws and nothing to do with the admirable skills involved in learning martial arts.
     
    Last edited: Dec 10, 2006
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. TimeTraveler Immortalist Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,023
    I think if we want to promote the banning of self defense, we should start by banning all cats that arent declawed, this way cats cannot scratch anyone anymore.

    It would be just as irrational as banning pitbulls in my opinion.

    Are we going to outlaw martial arts classes too so kids can't learn to fight when they get bullied?



    Still I disagree with it. I don't think breeds of dog should be banned. If it's on a leesh and properly trained, it should not be banned, and I've been chased by a dog before. I know what it's like to face a dog. Still, I know there seems to be people who just, don't like any form of self defense at all, I don't know why people figure it would be good to ban an entire breed of animal, thats just, ridiculously extreme.
     
  8. Prince_James Plutarch (Mickey's Dog) Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,214
    Actually, you are utterly and -completely- wrong on every single level of this argument.

    Completely and utterly wrong.

    Consider this video, even if it is a bit sappy: http://media.putfile.com/The-TRUTH-About-Pit-Bulls

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pit_bull

    Specifically: The American Temperament Test Society, Inc. (ATTS) breed statistics as of December 2005 show an 83.5% passing rate for the American Pit Bull Terrier and the American Staffordshire Terrier and a 84.7% passing rate for the Staffordshire bull terrier, as compared to an 81.2% average pass rate for all dog breeds.

    http://www.aspca.org/site/PageServer?pagename=pets_pitbull

    "These “early” pit bulls typically lived in their owner’s homes and actually earned the nickname of “nursemaid’s dog” because they were so reliable with young children. "

    Pit bulls are an utterly safe breed. The only problem is with bad training wedded to a viciousness of some of the owners, specifically black owners in the ghetto, where much of America's illegal dog fighting goes on. Moreover, any breeding for fighting a pit bull has had in its past, would be for -dogs-, not humans. Some pit bulls may be aggressive around other dogs, but humans are not dogs, and are not treated the same.
     
  9. TimeTraveler Immortalist Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,023
    Oh great, I just knew you'd add a racist twist to this.
    What exactly does being black have to do with being vicious?

    You think most people who fight dogs are black in the ghetto? Think again, that trend did not start in ghettos. It was going on in rural areas and all around the country since the very beginning. People were always fighting dogs, racing dogs, and abusing dogs.
     
  10. Prince_James Plutarch (Mickey's Dog) Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,214
    TimeTraveller:

    The majority of dog-fighting is in black areas. It is a "black neighbourhood" problem. This is, I believe, covered in the video.

    Moreover, dog fighting in rural areas isn't that popular anymore. It used to be, about a hundred years ago, but it is not now.
     
  11. Sauna Banned Banned

    Messages:
    763
    You are not actually defending yourself by keeping the dog, you are anticipating an attack, very much the same as those who anticipate an attack from you and your dog, which is commendably reasonable because that is what they do; that is what the dogs are bred for, and the reason to keep them and yourself restrained.
     
  12. The Devil Inside Banned Banned

    Messages:
    8,213

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    this is a picture of myself at the age of seven. this dog was my best friend until i was 12 years old. her name was Cleo.

    she was the most intelligent, gentle dog i have ever had the pleasure of being associated with, and i would murder my cat (whom i love very much) if i thought it would give me even a half hour with my old friend.

    valich, you are a douchebag that spouts what you see on television, trying to pass it off as your own opinion.
    you are detestable.
     
  13. Sauna Banned Banned

    Messages:
    763
    Identification is the greatest danger of keeping a beast, the tendency to end up with the same state of mind as the animal.
     
  14. guthrie paradox generator Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,089
    No, usually the owner gets a pet to suit their state of mind. Hence, if you want to look and act out your toughness, get a pit bull or rottweiller or something, and then badly train it.
    Then you'll increase the chance of it attacking someone.
     
  15. The Devil Inside Banned Banned

    Messages:
    8,213
    pit bulls are no more dangerous than any other animal that is domesticated and kept in homes.

    my cat learned how to stand on her hind legs to fight, because i taught her.

    the point is, animals do what they are trained to do, or to put it another way: dont be an asshole with a pit bull, and you wont end up with an asshole pit bull. treat it like a golden retriever.

    its obvious that some of you have never owned a dog.
     
  16. Sauna Banned Banned

    Messages:
    763
    This is of course true before they actually bite, but not afterwards.
     
  17. The Devil Inside Banned Banned

    Messages:
    8,213
    the same arguments against pit bulls could be made against people having children.
     
  18. Sauna Banned Banned

    Messages:
    763
    And should be, if your children behave the same way.
     
  19. The Devil Inside Banned Banned

    Messages:
    8,213
    *shakes head*

    no government has the right to deny me of children, or pet...perhaps licensing is acceptable, but bans are not.
     
  20. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    People have always bred some dogs of a variety of breeds for viciousness and will continue to do so. People have always even trained some dogs of otherwise tractable breeds for viciousness and will continue to do so. Rottweilers, Dobermans and Saint Bernards are responsible for huge numbers of unprovoked attacks every year. Even the beloved German shepherd shows up on the police blotter. Chows and shar-peis are widely distrusted and most breeders will not sell them to families with small children. I have seen no reports convincing me that pit bulls as a class present a significantly greater risk to children or other humans than any other dog that was not specifically bred to be gentle as a lamb like a golden retriever or a Pekinese.

    Pit bulls were never bred by the original developers for the instinct to attack people. That would have worked against themselves, since the dogs needed to be handled and they were destined to perform for crowds. However, they were bred for the instinct to attack other animals. From the owners I've talked to, most pit bulls are not safe around cats or dogs who are not significantly larger than themselves.

    For this reason I'm uneasy with pit bulls in my neighborhood. Every dog gets out of his yard once in a while, it's virtually unavoidable. Even mine do once every year or two, and I'm about as compulsively responsible a dog owner as you'll ever meet. But although mine might stupidly run into the street and get killed, they won't frighten anyone or hurt anything larger than a squirrel.

    That "once every year or two" when a pit bull gets out of his yard can be a nightmare for the entire neighborhood. Every pet under forty pounds is in mortal danger.

    Then there is the issue that not every dog has an AKC or other pedigree. Most dogs are crossbreeds. Pit bulls were bred rather recently by hybridizing several vaguely similar looking breeds including the children's favorite bull terrier. It's impossible to tell with certainty whether any dog that looks like a pit bull really is one.

    If pit bulls are legislated out of existence the people who now deliberately own vicious pit bulls will simply turn their attention to some other hapless breed. Presa canarios are already making the news.
     
  21. Dinosaur Rational Skeptic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,829
    The problem is not the dog. It is the owner.

    If you passed and implemented a law to have all pit bulls executed, the jerks would train Dobermans, German Sheperds, or some other breed to be vicious attack dogs.

    You can train most breeds to be either vicious or docile.

    BTW: When I was about ten years old, our next door neighbor had a dog that was a behavioral mess. He was never house broken, would not come when called, and generally caused minor annoyances to his owner. Our dogs were always well trained. One day after our neighbor commented on our well behaved dog, I asked my father why the neighbor's dog could not be trained. After the neightbor had left my father answered my question.
    • In order to train a dog, you have to be smarter than the dog.
     
  22. Sauna Banned Banned

    Messages:
    763

    http://www.dogbitelaw.com/PAGES/statistics.html

    key points:

     
  23. The Devil Inside Banned Banned

    Messages:
    8,213
    hardly an unbiased source.
    show an independant study.
     

Share This Page